A short and belated Decent Films update:
First, this coming Thursday, at 6:00pm EDT / 3:00pm PDT, I’ll be appearing on Catholic Answers Live. Tune in and listen!
Second, my review of the 1953 biblically-themed epic The Robe, now available in a new DVD edition (DVD | Blu-ray), is up at Decent Films.
Terrific movie! I’m re-watching it tonight. Very fanciful history (Caligula, for all his faults, was not a persecutor of Christians), but a great movie, nonetheless. It’s a crime that Jay Robinson wasn’t even nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor. I’ve always had the impression he had a ball playing Caligula. That has to be a role where it’s almost impossible to overact.
(blink blink)
Well, a lot of people feel that Robinson gave it his best shot. 🙂
I’ve not read THE ROBE, but I remember hearing that it has some serious Christological, and other theological, problems. Does anyone know what they are?
I’ve been a fan of The Robe for many years,and just got a copy of the original novel.
The bok is much different than the film,taking into account that the events in the film are in a different sequence than the book,and even then the book has more to it in the plotline seen in the film;including deleted scenes,dialogue ,and even quite a few characters. wound up on the cutting-room floor,in order to make the absolutely ponderous narrative workable as a film.
It’s the old ”adaptation madness ”at work again.
So much for the paring down of the book to workable screenplay.
While the book was better than the movie, never-the-less, the biggest problem with the book is that it denies the miraculous nature of the feeding of the 5,000. The book presents it as “the miracle was the generosity of the people” malarchy.
I agree.
100 percent.
I had almost forgotten that little piece of humanistic twaddle.
It’s the same as saying that the Parting of the Red Sea[NOT Reed Sea],was NOT a direct intervention of God,but an accident of nature,a phenomenon capitalized on by Moses to overawe a credulous Israelite multitude.The Bible is the Word of God;and ”modern” interpretations have completely shoved the supernatural nature of the Scriptures into a closet with the dust mop and cleaning fluids.
Some of this is entirely BY DESIGN on the part of opponents of Christianity,hoping to sow doubt and indecision.
There are ALWAYS some wiseacres in the gallery wanting to diminish or outright explain away God’s wondrous Miracles on our behalf.
What a sad commentary on the state of their souls.
The mass media of today are primwe examples of the animosity that is harbored by most of the intelligentsia liberalis towards Faith and people of Faith.
It’s mostly blind unreasoning hatred.
Does the book otherwise present unvarnished miracles?
What about the robe itself? FWIW, a bonus feature on the DVD describes how the screenwriter intended to present the robe’s effect on Marcellus as entirely psychological rather than miraculous. I’m not sure that necessarily comes across, although a friend has reminded me that there is one scene in which Demetrius says something like this to Marcellus (I’ll have to go over the exact words used to make a final call).
I would be interested in how this (and other miracles) come across in the book. It is interesting to note that Miriam’s “miracle” is clearly a moral one and she does not receive a physical healing. Oh, but the boy to whom Marcellus gives the donkey — he was born with twisted feet, and Jesus healed him, so that seems to be one fairly well-documented miraculous healing in the film.
I would be interested in how this (and other miracles) come across in the book.
The one I remember off the top of my head is the cure of a boy with a club foot.